My Pages

Sunday, 24 June 2012

Almost 10 years
ago, I went on a walk around my neighbourhood with my uncle as he lamented the
apparent disobedience of his sons to obey an order he had given.

I could sympathise
with him at the same time that I was strongly disagreeing with the premise of
his irritation.

His sons being
European citizens resident for just about a decade in England were instructed
to send a letter of invitation to a distant cousin of theirs, which they
refused to comply with, the circumstances of which I will not delve into but
the fundamentals remain the same.

Unlike anywhere
else, your name, your address and all your dealings in the West make up your
reputational value that determines your credit rating for credit worthiness and
other issues of integrity.

Your name is all that matters

Especially, in
circumstances where you are legally resident and gainfully employed, you want
to be in control of all the variables that make up your reputational value and
most especially the people you decide to vouch for as referees, guarantors,
sureties or witnesses.

My cousins had in
their time in Europe understood this very salient point that they were ready to
defy patriarchal authority to protect what many might think is intangible but is of the utmost importance to their livelihood, integrity and reputation –
especially in an era where background checks are becoming quite standard for
things as mundane as basic employment contracts.

A tarnished name by
reason of acts of omission, inadvertent activity or unfortunate circumstance of
some misfortune can take more than a decade to repair, the price for such a
lapse in judgement, process or attention to the minutiae is just too high to
expend on the apparent mundane act of writing a letter of invitation for a relation that can be vouched for by your father – the stakes are too high and in
my view the boys were right – reputation counts, integrity counts and
perception counts, always.

Farouk Lawan

This brings me to
two recent events that Nigerians will be familiar with, the first relates to
the Fuel Subsidy probe conducted by an ad-hoc committee of the House of
Representatives.

We were literally
glued to every communication device we could find that relayed the proceedings
of that committee headed by Farouk Lawan who in the chair achieved almost
hagiographic levels of praise for exposing the corrupt enterprise that was a
nexus of government institutions, political appointees and private companies
siphoning untold amounts of money to the tune of 10 times more than had been budgeted
for by the Federal Government, it was an unprecedented scam that threatened to
drag the name of the Presidency into the muck.

As it transpired a
report was published and as it was being deliberated on, Farouk Lawan asked for
the House to exculpate two companies because the committee had lately received
fresh evidence on that matter. The House obliged.

Unbeknownst to us,
a sting operation apparently engineered with the security agencies involving
principals of the exculpated companies had successfully mired Farouk Lawan in a
corrupt transaction that purportedly had him recorded on video collecting moneys
from an oil baron in the dead of the night.

Lost on all fronts

Whatever plans
Farouk Lawan might have had to expose the attempts of persons close to the
Presidency to suborn legislative process and cast aspersions on the report he
helped pen came to naught when those persons went public before him and then he did
not immediately quash the rumours, he dissimulated, he deigned, he confessed and then spun tales.

His fight back was timid
at best, but his reputation had been done irreparable damage and the report we
had so greatly lauded was about to go down the drain with him.

The House of Representatives
has done the minimum possible to restore the integrity of the report by
censuring Farouk Lawan, deposing him and restoring the exculpated companies to
the original indictments made in the report.

Ideally, I would
have preferred the House of Representatives audit that report independently
against the originally collected evidence and then reissue it, but that is a
matter of process and procedure.

Perceptions on reputation

The second concerns
people I respect and engage with, mostly on Twitter but in certain instances we
have communicated through other channels.

They have not
reached the point where their integrity and reputation is irredeemable but this and Farouk Lawan’s situation highlights how differently
we tackle these matters between those of us in Diaspora and those of us back
home in Nigeria.

Whereas, we in
Diaspora will put in place systems, processes and safeguards to ensure that
nothing ever touches the issues of our person, our character, our integrity,
our reputation and every perception of our standing, our people back home are
more poised to wait to defend the same when it comes under attack but risk losing the
battle of hearts and minds when they are not prompt, forceful and immediate in
disputing all assertions and aspersions.

This is not to confirm
the presence of an impropriety, in fact, there is probably none and the
circumstances within which they work and operate might impact on their ability
to respond as promptly as might be required.

My view on Dana Crash Action

Once again, I find
myself sympathising and even understanding but disagreeing with their approach
to reputational and integrity issues, these are not matters to be trifled with
and to tackle the same with deference to a few, seeming indifference to some
and possibly arrogance bordering on hubris to others with the view that they are being so principled and above reproach is to misunderstand the considerable fallout
that might ensue from this matter.

Much more than Dana
Crash Action rests on how the principals respond to the attempts to besmirch
their good names, their humanitarian efforts, the friends they interact and
associate with, and each subsequent worthwhile campaign launched in spite of
and despite the government on Social Media.

I have been
informed a comprehensive report debunking all claims and assertions will be released
at the end of the month.

However, it is not a matter
of being answerable to anyone or being accountable to anyone, it is one of
being seen to be accountable regardless, acting transparently regardless, doing
that promptly regardless, protecting the present and future reputational value
above all else and at the same time learning one serious lesson from Farouk
Lawan that no matter the hundreds of millions of dollars that oil companies
will pay in fines and restitution with regards to the fuel subsidy scam, a man’s
honour and integrity is still priceless.